Slashdot Mirror

CodePlex (http://codeplex.com) hosts over 4500 projects licensed under GPLv2 or LGPL (the majority of which are under GPL). Ironically, one of those projects is a Linux distro.

CodePlex Foundation - a different thing (http://codeplex.org) - doesn't mention GPL at all on the website - which, admittedly, raises a brow for an OSS-centric organization - but I still don't see how it makes it "GPL hostile". It looks more like an awkward silence to me.

If you're stuck on 5 you might be out of luck.

Hey look, text with links added to it.

And how are GUI tools on Linux any different?

PS isn't limited to the command line; it can also interact with any COM applications, an extremely common task. WSH let you totally automate window interaction - I don't know if PS does, but this plugin for PS seems to aim for that.

But they are doing that? The /. article was just written by an idiot who didn't check his shit and wrote bunch of bullshit without any reference.
asp.net MVC 2.0 sourcecode, dated 11 march 2010 http://aspnet.codeplex.com/releases/view/41742
freshly updated MS blogs regarding asp.net http://weblogs.asp.net/
forums regarding most MS technologies seems pretty much alive also http://forums.asp.net/
etc...
seems to me everything is very much alive, unlike some other open source projects...

http://www.codeplex.com/

There, you'll find the source to lots of stuff, too much to name really. Feel free to download it and try it out.

Anyway, you were saying something about how having a couple of open source projects absolves you of being responsible for attacks your company makes against open source projects? Or perhaps you were just being a disingenuous apologist for your favourite brand name company.

Depends on how you define either one.

Anyway, Wikipedia has a more detailed high-level description of Singularity, and the source code for it is available (use, modification and redistribution allowed non-commercial academic use only - not FLOSS). Assuming that Midori is a further development from that (and we don't really know), you can take a look at those two and judge for yourself.

Try taking some MS code, and improving on it. IF MS approves of it, they will put their name on it, making it their own, then they will either use it, or drown it in the sea of obscurity surrounding Redmond.

That's not entirely true. Microsoft do release some things under open source languages; the most notable that I'm aware of is the Dynamic Language Runtime for .NET

Don't use a tool like this for testing. Start with AutoIt or nunit+white, and look at commercial tools if those don't do what you need.

No, you're not. I logged in just so I can make this same comment. I guess I've been working in .NET for too long

Not long enough, apparently.

Find an existing project that interests you and work on it.
Developers need projects to collaborate on. Fortunately, many projects already exist.

To find a project just browse open source projects on sites like SourceForge, Google Code, CodePlex, etc. Don't waste your time (and life) working on projects that don't get you excited. If you're not interested in a project it will feel more like work than it has to.

Twenty heads are better than two.

I don't get all the hate either, as I've also had nothing but positive experiences with Silverlight (which runs MUCH better than the bloaty Flash piggy) and folks are cooking up some pretty cool tricks with it. Check out Windows4All which is a Virtual OS done in Silverlight. It is pretty neat, with Google Earth, Virtual PC, a Twitter Client, all running in a sandboxed Silverlight. And on this 1.7Ghz Sempron I'm typing this from it actually works quite well. And since it has a built in sandboxed IE if they can get this to run on Moonlight Linux users will have an easy way to get around those "IE only" sites. Maybe someone with Moonlight can give it a go, and tell us if it runs?

But there is just so much competition out there on the web and i just don't see MSFT being able to pull the 800 pound gorilla bit that much anymore. With the web it is too easy to just go around MSFT, and Vista showed they can't just dump a turkey and expect folks to jump on board like in the old days. And if Silverlight or SVG or the video tag kills the bloated ziggy piggy known as Flash I am all for it, I don't care who gets the ball rolling. That is the most bloated POS software I have seen in ages, and everybody has to have it for web video. I'm by Flash now like I was by IE 6 then. The sooner it is dead, the better.

Regarding "This application requires the Image Mastering API v2":

Are you using Windows XP? From the bottom of the download page:

"Microsoft Image Mastering API v2 must be installed. It can be downloaded at http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=B5F726F1-4ACE-455D-BAD7-ABC4DD2F147B&displaylang=en"

The licenses for most software are designed to take away your freedom to share and change it. ...

Source: http://wudt.codeplex.com/ from TFA.

Ya know, I've created more bootable (and/or non-bootable) CDs and DVDs than I care to count. I've also created (almost routinely) bootable (and/or non-bootable) USB hard drives drives, USB flash drives, flash memory cards, and SSDs.

I've read the two stories, the two respective articles, visited any links provided, re-read your quote, and I still don't know WTF this tool is supposed to do.

Is it a download tool (ftp, wget, fetch), a CD mastering or burning tool (cdrtools, growisofs, burncd), a disk or file system tool (fdisk, newfs, mke2fs), a copy tool (cp, tar, cpio, dump, dd), something else, something more, or all of the above wrapped in a wizard or some sort of GUI?

Actually they have, if fairly recently. However they are farther along with open source than many people believe, they've even started their own version of sourceforge called CodePlex that hosts open source projects and developer tools. You can search directly by license type for software released under a number of licenses, including GPL.

"The Windows 7 USB/DVD Download tool allows you to create a copy of your Windows 7 ISO file on a USB flash drive or a DVD. To create a bootable DVD or USB flash drive, download the ISO file and then run the Windows 7 USB/DVD Download tool. Once this is done, you can install Windows 7 directly from the USB flash drive or DVD."

Source: http://wudt.codeplex.com/ from TFA.

http://www.codeplex.com/singularity

Your words, I want to see you eat them.

What the heck? You mean they're somehow pretending to NOT be a Microsoft front?

I've gone to CodePlex several times for various curiosities, such as a graphics engine or neato research oriented OS. Every time I've gone to CodePlex I've only seen Microsoft Research spinouts or code built for Microsoft stacks.

I thought it was just Microsoft's "community" site from the get go - never knew they were trying to avoid that branding.

What the heck? You mean they're somehow pretending to NOT be a Microsoft front?

I've gone to CodePlex several times for various curiosities, such as a graphics engine or neato research oriented OS. Every time I've gone to CodePlex I've only seen Microsoft Research spinouts or code built for Microsoft stacks.

I thought it was just Microsoft's "community" site from the get go - never knew they were trying to avoid that branding.

Have you actually read the Codeplex bylaws and what types of licenses they want?

Well, yes:

What licenses does CodePlex support?

Project coordinators can select from a list of the following OSI licenses: Apache License 2.0, Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL), Eclipse Public License (EPL), GNU General Public License (GPL) v2, GNU Library General Public License (LGPL), Microsoft Public License (Ms-PL), Microsoft Reciprocal License (Ms-RL), Mozilla Public License 1.1 (MPL), New BSD License, and The MIT License. If your project requires a license that is not on the list, you can request a custom license using the contact us form.

So far as I know, all of the above are "open source", including both Ms-* licenses (according to both OSI and FSF). In addition, Ms-RL is strong copyleft according to FSF. So, what's wrong with the selection? GPL is allowed; BSDL is allowed; what else do you want?

Heck, there are Linux distros hosted on CodePlex without any problem!

Have you actually read the Codeplex bylaws and what types of licenses they want?

Well, yes:

What licenses does CodePlex support?

Project coordinators can select from a list of the following OSI licenses: Apache License 2.0, Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL), Eclipse Public License (EPL), GNU General Public License (GPL) v2, GNU Library General Public License (LGPL), Microsoft Public License (Ms-PL), Microsoft Reciprocal License (Ms-RL), Mozilla Public License 1.1 (MPL), New BSD License, and The MIT License. If your project requires a license that is not on the list, you can request a custom license using the contact us form.

So far as I know, all of the above are "open source", including both Ms-* licenses (according to both OSI and FSF). In addition, Ms-RL is strong copyleft according to FSF. So, what's wrong with the selection? GPL is allowed; BSDL is allowed; what else do you want?

Heck, there are Linux distros hosted on CodePlex without any problem!

Have you actually read the Codeplex bylaws and what types of licenses they want?

Well, yes:

What licenses does CodePlex support?

Project coordinators can select from a list of the following OSI licenses: Apache License 2.0, Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL), Eclipse Public License (EPL), GNU General Public License (GPL) v2, GNU Library General Public License (LGPL), Microsoft Public License (Ms-PL), Microsoft Reciprocal License (Ms-RL), Mozilla Public License 1.1 (MPL), New BSD License, and The MIT License. If your project requires a license that is not on the list, you can request a custom license using the contact us form.

So far as I know, all of the above are "open source", including both Ms-* licenses (according to both OSI and FSF). In addition, Ms-RL is strong copyleft according to FSF. So, what's wrong with the selection? GPL is allowed; BSDL is allowed; what else do you want?

Heck, there are Linux distros hosted on CodePlex without any problem!

http://singularity.codeplex.com/ :D

"Since we only have a limited time on earth, I have decided to spend my time on earth as much as I can trying to be like the second salesman. Looking at opportunities where others see hopelessness"

Which begs the question as to why expend so much energy in duplicating dotNET onto the Linux platform. Isn't whole the MONO effort diverting developers from developing native Linux applications?

"The creation of the CodePlex foundation was an internal effort of people that believe in open source at Microsoft. They have been working from within the company to change it. Working at CodePlex is a great way of helping steer Microsoft in the right direction"

What was wrong with SourceForge. If I was cynical and recalling Microsoft's past behaviour, including tthe NovoSOFT trojan .. er covenant, I would suspect this as yet another attempt to co-opt and control a technology they don't own. Why not contribute to SourceForge instead of creating and stacking their own organization. Same with the numerous Microsoft 'open source' licenses. It's very telling that GPL 3 is not one of the supported licenses on CodePlex.

And as an 'open source' supporter I fail to understand how you would recommend something called the LinuxHater's Blog

'If you're a freetard, but you need to run Windows at work or something, I've got an idea for a utility that will keep you true to the cause'

'How many hours do I have to waste wading through the monument of shit known as the debian package repository?'

Could you elaborate?

Well, aside from actively working with the Mono guys, for example...

There's also CodePlex.

Apple publishes the source code for the UNIX part of its operating system under an OSI license.

There are tons of free Unixes out there, so this isn't really earth-shattering. The question is, what does it actually let you do to OS X?

And the answer is, not much. The OS X GUI, which is the whole reason most people would want OS X in the first place, is opaque. It's been awhile, but last I checked, the Darwin included in OS X is heavily Tivo-ized -- you can get most of the source to it, but you can't compile your own version and expect it to run OS X.

Also, I'm curious if anyone has attempted to completely remove Finder and the Dock, and have a usable system that can still run OS X apps. (If not actually remove from disk, at least ensure they aren't what's started on boot -- develop another shell, for instance.) Because you can run a replacement shell on Windows.

Regardless, the only platform Microsoft has that's even close to as locked-down as the iPhone is the Xbox 360, and there don't seem to be nearly as many horror stories about their approval process there.

sounds like their is a secure solution Cryttr mostly does that. although I am not sure this would really accomplish what you wanted unless the bank was willing to exchange keys with you as well.

There is an extension for IE that might fit what you are looking for:
http://adblockie.codeplex.com/

It also has the benefit of being Open Sauce for you guys who like to tinker with code.

There will never be an AdBlock or AdBlock+ for IE from the original authors. Those extensions rely on XUL and Javascript to make Firefox do what they want. Extensions for IE have to be programmed in a language like C++ and compiled into binary blob, and can only use pre-defined hooks into the browser.

That hasn't kept anyone from posting. The articles don't go into detail what exactly the deal is, either.

Under the deal - the product of a legal suit - Google would establish a $125m (£77m) fund to compensate those whose works it published online.

It would establish a Book Rights Registry so that authors whose work it digitised were paid when their material was viewed online.

There already exists a open source download tool with which you can fetch 95% -- as much as Google offers/digitized -- of any book, so the fear is understandable.

I guess flatrate for authors or making it a just a preview to find out if this is the right book might be options that the authors will agree on.

Two requests for Codeplex to support GPLv3 are here and here.

Two requests for Codeplex to support GPLv3 are here and here.

Hmm. MS's recommended migration path from Visual FoxPro is to .NET and SQL Server. I wrote a tool to simplify migration of VFP databases to PostgreSQL instead. Wonder if they'd like to host it for me?

Sure, why not? They host a RedHat-based Linux distro on CodePlex, I don't know how you could possibly go beyond that.

In general, all you need to know is written in EULA (and this specific sentence is also quoted on CodePlex front page):

"Microsoft does not control, review, revise, endorse or distribute third-party Submissions. Microsoft is hosting the CodePlex site solely as a web storage site as a service to the developer community."

And regarding the licenses, from the FAQ:

"Project coordinators can select from a list of the following OSI licenses: Apache License 2.0, Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL), Eclipse Public License (EPL), GNU General Public License (GPL) v2, GNU Library General Public License (LGPL), Microsoft Public License (Ms-PL), Microsoft Reciprocal License (Ms-RL), Mozilla Public License 1.1 (MPL), New BSD License, and The MIT License."

So long as your project is under one of those, it doesn't matter what it does - you can host it.

What licenses does CodePlex support?

Project coordinators can select from a list of the following OSI licenses: Apache License 2.0, Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL), Eclipse Public License (EPL), GNU General Public License (GPL) v2, GNU Library General Public License (LGPL), Microsoft Public License (Ms-PL), Microsoft Reciprocal License (Ms-RL), Mozilla Public License 1.1 (MPL), New BSD License, and The MIT License. If your project requires a license that is not on the list, you can request a custom license using the contact us form.

All of these are open source licences (the two Microsoft ones are approved by the OSI here and here; the FSF also acknowledges them here as free licences, though not recommended).

A pity that GPLv3 isn't allowed, but maybe they'll add it if asked.

To be fair, Microsoft has made a big push into opening their source code and helping spearhead community-led projects. Two examples:

• Source code for ASP.NET MVC, ASP.NET AJAX, etc.
• Source code for the ASP.NET AJAX Control Toolkit, a joint project between Microsoft and the community

Granted, the first one isn't a true open source project in that they don't accept patches from the community, but I think that if you compare today's Microsoft and their culture toward sharing source code with the community is quite a bit different from what it was, say, 5 years ago.

To be fair, Microsoft has made a big push into opening their source code and helping spearhead community-led projects. Two examples:

• Source code for ASP.NET MVC, ASP.NET AJAX, etc.
• Source code for the ASP.NET AJAX Control Toolkit, a joint project between Microsoft and the community

Granted, the first one isn't a true open source project in that they don't accept patches from the community, but I think that if you compare today's Microsoft and their culture toward sharing source code with the community is quite a bit different from what it was, say, 5 years ago.

You mean another implementation of *everything* for Microsoft's .NET framework:

http://www.codeplex.com/IronPython (Python!)
http://www.codeplex.com/IronScheme (Scheme!)
http://nua.codeplex.com/ (Lua!)
http://www.ironruby.net/ (Ruby!)
(Perl conspicuously absent ...)

Now, let's discuss your allegation than Python and VB are re-inventions of COBOL. Let's look first at what is shared: some syntax. As far as I can tell (and please correct me if I'm wrong), they share little else. For example, boolean expressions are composed with "and," "or," and "not." They also use some of the same operators, such as ">" and "
(Aside: I had to read up on COBOL to write this post, and frankly, COBOL reads a lot more like SQL to me than it does like either VB or Python).

I think that Python has far more in common with LISP than with COBOL. Lexical scoping? Functions as first-class data? Built-in "map" and "apply" methods? Smells like functional programming to me. From what I've read about COBOL, it has none of these things. Also, though they both have OO features, COBOL had to *add* those features in 2002. So even COBOL is "re-inventing" the features of other languages.

I think if you replaced "re-invent" with "learn from" in your statement, you would be closer to the truth. After all, that is in my mind what COBOL did: they saw that object-oriented features could be powerful additions to their language, so they added them. Language designers are taking what they like or what works (or perhaps sometimes, what is most popular) from existing languages, and putting together languages that meet their needs.

For example, look at the Boo programming language. It takes the features the author loved about the .NET framework and the Python programming language and puts them together into a new language that has developed a strong following (it even has language macros a la LISP ... totally sweet). For its devotees, Boo meets their needs, and it was able to do so by fusing together what the author deemed the best features of existing languages and then building upon them.

You mean another implementation of *everything* for Microsoft's .NET framework:

http://www.codeplex.com/IronPython (Python!)
http://www.codeplex.com/IronScheme (Scheme!)
http://nua.codeplex.com/ (Lua!)
http://www.ironruby.net/ (Ruby!)
(Perl conspicuously absent ...)

Now, let's discuss your allegation than Python and VB are re-inventions of COBOL. Let's look first at what is shared: some syntax. As far as I can tell (and please correct me if I'm wrong), they share little else. For example, boolean expressions are composed with "and," "or," and "not." They also use some of the same operators, such as ">" and "
(Aside: I had to read up on COBOL to write this post, and frankly, COBOL reads a lot more like SQL to me than it does like either VB or Python).

I think that Python has far more in common with LISP than with COBOL. Lexical scoping? Functions as first-class data? Built-in "map" and "apply" methods? Smells like functional programming to me. From what I've read about COBOL, it has none of these things. Also, though they both have OO features, COBOL had to *add* those features in 2002. So even COBOL is "re-inventing" the features of other languages.

I think if you replaced "re-invent" with "learn from" in your statement, you would be closer to the truth. After all, that is in my mind what COBOL did: they saw that object-oriented features could be powerful additions to their language, so they added them. Language designers are taking what they like or what works (or perhaps sometimes, what is most popular) from existing languages, and putting together languages that meet their needs.

For example, look at the Boo programming language. It takes the features the author loved about the .NET framework and the Python programming language and puts them together into a new language that has developed a strong following (it even has language macros a la LISP ... totally sweet). For its devotees, Boo meets their needs, and it was able to do so by fusing together what the author deemed the best features of existing languages and then building upon them.

You mean another implementation of *everything* for Microsoft's .NET framework:

http://www.codeplex.com/IronPython (Python!)
http://www.codeplex.com/IronScheme (Scheme!)
http://nua.codeplex.com/ (Lua!)
http://www.ironruby.net/ (Ruby!)
(Perl conspicuously absent ...)

Now, let's discuss your allegation than Python and VB are re-inventions of COBOL. Let's look first at what is shared: some syntax. As far as I can tell (and please correct me if I'm wrong), they share little else. For example, boolean expressions are composed with "and," "or," and "not." They also use some of the same operators, such as ">" and "
(Aside: I had to read up on COBOL to write this post, and frankly, COBOL reads a lot more like SQL to me than it does like either VB or Python).

I think that Python has far more in common with LISP than with COBOL. Lexical scoping? Functions as first-class data? Built-in "map" and "apply" methods? Smells like functional programming to me. From what I've read about COBOL, it has none of these things. Also, though they both have OO features, COBOL had to *add* those features in 2002. So even COBOL is "re-inventing" the features of other languages.

I think if you replaced "re-invent" with "learn from" in your statement, you would be closer to the truth. After all, that is in my mind what COBOL did: they saw that object-oriented features could be powerful additions to their language, so they added them. Language designers are taking what they like or what works (or perhaps sometimes, what is most popular) from existing languages, and putting together languages that meet their needs.

For example, look at the Boo programming language. It takes the features the author loved about the .NET framework and the Python programming language and puts them together into a new language that has developed a strong following (it even has language macros a la LISP ... totally sweet). For its devotees, Boo meets their needs, and it was able to do so by fusing together what the author deemed the best features of existing languages and then building upon them.

Actually in Verisoft XT the successor of Verisoft now real C code is verified, including e.g. PikeOS with PowerPC assembly in a system developed to DO-178B airplane verification. In that project an important tool for C code verification is VCC developed by Microsoft Research, source included at that site.

They aren't built-in, but there are plenty of programs to do "virtual desktops' on Windows. The one I like most (solid, nice features, sufficiently lightweight, and open source) calls itself Vista/XP Virtual Desktop Manager:
http://www.codeplex.com/vdm

Even better: many useful "official" widgets are available as Open Source in the Silverlight toolkit:

http://codeplex.com/Silverlight

This toolkit is great even for WPF developers because they are liberally licensed (the MS-PL is like the BSD or MIT/X11 licenses) and thus quite customizable for WPF applications that need to do things that normal WPF controls can't quite handle.

Background Intelligent Transfer Service (BITS) can be used to transfer files between windows servers. It is the technology behind Windows Update. We use it in our company to transfer files across a low bandwidth sattelite connection. Great thing is that it can automatically resume transfer after rebooting both machines. SharpBits offer a nice .NET API. You can find it here: http://www.codeplex.com/sharpbits

How about being able to target .NET 1.1, 2.0, 3.0, or 3.5? I thought that was pretty significant. Before, if you wanted to target .NET 1.1, you had to use VS 2003. If you wanted to target 2.0, you had to use 2005. With 2008, you can target any of them.

Not exactly. You can't target any pre-2.0 framework with VS 2005/08/10. It's unfortunate, and is the reason our developers still have to keep a copy of VS 2002 around. There was a community attempt to write a MSBuild extension that could target fw 1.1, but I'm not sure what the status of it is.

So I'm curious, since you're so obsessed with all this hot butt sex you've been having as Microsoft screws you, just how have they screwed you lately? What hostile actions has Microsoft taken towards open source lately? Was it opening the Microsoft Open Source Labs? Was it making sure PHP runs equally well on IIS as it does on Apache? Was it launching the open source .NET portal CodePlex? Maybe it was their monetary investment in several big open source projects? Wow, damn those evil bastards!!

One thing I hope PHP would have is GUI stuff for both Windows and Linux.

For Windows, have a look at Phalanger. It's effectively an implementation of PHP on .NET platform (Microsoft sponsored, but open source under a non-GPL, custom copyleft license). It can work with web PHP apps just fine, but it also gives you access to the entire .NET framework class libraries, including WinForms. And it supports the visual form designer in Visual Studio.

Oh yes, and it extended the language to support namespaces, and it uses ::: for namespace separator ;)

First, JavaScript is a very nice language indeed. If you've never learned functional programming, JavaScript is a good language to learn in. Why? You can actually do real work while learning! As for the new language spec...

Getters and setters are nice, but I'm not sure they serve a purpose in javascript--javascript is more functional than it is OO and I think people learning the language should change mindsets rather than the langage get bastardized to something it is not. I dunno, somebody can challenge me on this.

Good to see they are thinking about adding a "use strict". You aren't an adult language until you have a way to force variable declaration. Hopefully "use strict" will apply to a module or block, not to the entire project. I want to "strictify" my own JavaScript, but I dont want the browser to choke on some sloppy copy-and-paste deal from AdSense or analytics.

Lastly, JSON. There are a couple "gotchas" with it... namely when you generate JSON using a loosely typed language like Perl and try to feed it into a strongly typed language like C# (i.e. silverlight). Depending on the serializer / deserializer used on the strongly-typed side, you'll run into things.

For example, the deserializer in C# just might choke on this:
"themes": [ // it will puke on this:
        {
                "theme_id": "34", // i am a string!
                "last_mod": "2009-04-09 13:04:27.232-07" // I am a postgresql date, but I'd also barf on ISO8601
        }, // puke free:
        {
                "theme_id": 34, // I am an int!
                "last_mod": new Date(3000, 00, 01, 00, 00, 00) // i am a legit Date()
        }

]

Why? Perl serialized the integers as a string. Depending on the deseralizer, it might choke on those strings if it was expecting a number. YUI would also be pissed off about the date not being a javascript Date()--good luck finding a serializer that produces such a thing! My point? These are some surprise gotchas you have to worry about when dealing with JSON. Not sure who is to "blame"--perl for being loosely typed, the deserializers for being to strict. This would be a problem with XML as well though.

With SilverSprite you can get 2D XNA games running inside of Silverlight as well. :)

Word has it that Microsoft created a speedy IronPython implementation on their Common Language Runtime and JIT technology for .NET. Here are benchmarks for it. Failing to find similar benchmarks for comparison; can anybody else contribute to this info?...

Correcting you there: you can run Python on it, but .NET is not "like" Python and neither is .NET "like" Java..

http://www.codeplex.com/Wiki/View.aspx?ProjectName=IronPython

Microsoft released a beta of the datagrid awhile back and they officially released the datagrid for wpf at last years PDC out of their ship cycle due to so many complaints. It is downloadable at http://www.codeplex.com/wpf